Show Media

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds substantial context: required permissions, delegated token behavior, and expiring token support. This goes beyond annotations. Minor gap: no mention of error behavior or response format, but that's acceptable given annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is overly verbose and includes token permission details that are not directly about the tool's operation. The core purpose is front-loaded but then followed by a large block of authentication boilerplate that could be separated or summarized. It does not earn its place for a simple fetch tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given there is no output schema and the tool is a simple read operation, the description covers necessary auth requirements and the basic action. It lacks details on what the returned media object contains, but that may be expected from the API. It is mostly complete for the tool's complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters, including the media_hashed_id, include enum, account, and description_format. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Fetches a single media by its hashed id'. Clear and unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like get_media_stats, get_media_analytics, or list_media, so it falls short of 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description lists required permissions and token types, which implicitly guide when the tool can be used, but does not explicitly say when to use this vs. alternatives like list_media or get_media_stats. Usage is implied rather than stated.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.